Skip to content

Quantifiers with multiple bindings #6585

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Jan 19, 2022
Merged

Conversation

kroening
Copy link
Member

  • Each commit message has a non-empty body, explaining why the change was made.
  • Methods or procedures I have added are documented, following the guidelines provided in CODING_STANDARD.md.
  • n/a The feature or user visible behaviour I have added or modified has been documented in the User Guide in doc/cprover-manual/
  • Regression or unit tests are included, or existing tests cover the modified code (in this case I have detailed which ones those are in the commit message).
  • n/a My commit message includes data points confirming performance improvements (if claimed).
  • My PR is restricted to a single feature or bugfix.
  • n/a White-space or formatting changes outside the feature-related changed lines are in commits of their own.

This adds support for pretty-printing forall/exists expressions that have
multiple bindings.
This adds support for converting forall/exists expressions that have
multiple bindings to SMT2.
This adds convenience constructors for forall/exists expressions with
multiple bindings.
The simplifier can now simplify !exists and !forall with multiple bindings.
@kroening kroening force-pushed the quantifier-multi-binding branch from 59205b7 to b165bf9 Compare January 17, 2022 20:26
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 17, 2022

Codecov Report

Merging #6585 (59205b7) into develop (907a214) will increase coverage by 0.01%.
The diff coverage is 98.83%.

❗ Current head 59205b7 differs from pull request most recent head b165bf9. Consider uploading reports for the commit b165bf9 to get more accurate results
Impacted file tree graph

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop    #6585      +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage    76.19%   76.21%   +0.01%     
===========================================
  Files         1578     1578              
  Lines       181276   181392     +116     
===========================================
+ Hits        138132   138249     +117     
+ Misses       43144    43143       -1     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
jbmc/src/jbmc/jbmc_parse_options.cpp 72.31% <ø> (ø)
src/cbmc/cbmc_parse_options.cpp 77.39% <ø> (ø)
src/goto-analyzer/goto_analyzer_parse_options.cpp 71.94% <ø> (ø)
src/goto-cc/linker_script_merge.h 100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/goto-diff/goto_diff_parse_options.cpp 58.33% <ø> (ø)
...rc/goto-instrument/goto_instrument_parse_options.h 100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/goto-programs/slice_global_inits.h 0.00% <ø> (ø)
src/util/format_expr.cpp 86.51% <85.71%> (-0.36%) ⬇️
src/goto-cc/linker_script_merge.cpp 79.12% <98.33%> (ø)
src/ansi-c/ansi_c_internal_additions.cpp 90.12% <100.00%> (ø)
... and 31 more

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 49fb197...b165bf9. Read the comment docs.

@kroening kroening marked this pull request as ready for review January 18, 2022 08:02
Copy link
Contributor

@TGWDB TGWDB left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Any chance of some tests of this code?

@peterschrammel peterschrammel removed their assignment Jan 19, 2022
@kroening kroening merged commit ded98de into develop Jan 19, 2022
@kroening kroening deleted the quantifier-multi-binding branch January 19, 2022 12:04
@kroening
Copy link
Member Author

Tests are coming in the branch model_refinement

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants